Israeli Spyder system emerges as front runner for Indian Army's air defence needs

[mehboobkz]

Israeli Spyder system emerges as front runner for Indian Army's air defence needs

Read more at:
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com...ofinterest&utm_medium=text&utm_campaign=cppst

 

[SQ8]

Would have been stupid otherwise due to commonality issues and that the system itself is pretty good.

 

[Ankit Kumar 002]

Would have been stupid otherwise due to commonality issues and that the system itself is pretty good.

Sir its IAF operating SPYDER MR. And I don't think choosing SPYDER SR for Army should offer a big advantage in commonality. Yes its one factor , but not the deciding one.

Its different lobbies making different noises.

If all the three candidates have passed the tests , then its the lowest bidder and that I think will be Russia with Tor .

 

[Agent_47]

Sir its IAF operating SPYDER MR. And I don't think choosing SPYDER SR for Army should offer a big advantage in commonality. Yes its one factor , but not the deciding one.

No,IAF uses SPYDER for SR/QR duties the same requirmnets IA have.
Tor is of wheeled SAM which is entirely different category.

 

[Ankit Kumar 002]

No,IAF uses SPYDER for SR/QR duties the same requirmnets IA have.
Tor is of wheeled SAM which is entirely different category.

SIPRI Arms transfer for 2014says 6 SPYDER MR systems delivered to IAF. (SPYDER SR has a range of 15 km, while MR has 35km)

Indian Army according to its RFI issued is looking for a Quick Reaction SAM , in which SPYDER SR was offered by Israel.

Further Tor system was offered by Russia. And one more system by Sweden , all the three have underwent trials and all the three are mounted upon either TATRA or TATA 6x6/8x8.

 

[Agent_47]

SIPRI Arms transfer for 2014says 6 SPYDER MR systems delivered to IAF. (SPYDER SR has a range of 15 km, while MR has 35km)

But the system requirement and the usage is as SR/QR SAM(LLQRM). having a better range does not make it bad in short ranges. Also it is up to the user to call it SR or MR. For IAF, MR SAM is Barak 8.(And navy call the same LR)

Indian Army according to its RFI issued is looking for a Quick Reaction SAM , in which SPYDER SR was offered by Israel.

Same was the case for IAF, BAck in 2007

Following approval from the Cabinet Committee on Security (CCS) earlier this year, the IAF has chosen to purchase the SpyDer-SR (short-range) variant

http://www.livefistdefence.com/2007/05/livefist-exclusive-iafs-spyder-purchase.html

Also, ultimately Spyder will not get the order because DRDO QR/SR SAM is in advanced stage of development (Months away from trials start). Btw range of this new SAM is 30km nothing short. @Oscar

https://twitter.com/x/status/726768642378092544

Its different lobbies making different noises.

Look at the datasheet, Spyder is simply better than the rest + IAF already uses it. no need to bring in conspiracy theories.

 

[Ankit Kumar 002]

But the system requirement and the usage is as SR/QR SAM(LLQRM). having a better range does not make it bad in short ranges. Also it is up to the user to call it SR or MR. For IAF, MR SAM is Barak 8.(And navy call the same LR)


Same was the case for IAF, BAck in 2007


http://www.livefistdefence.com/2007/05/livefist-exclusive-iafs-spyder-purchase.html

But there is a difference between SR and MR versions and I was referring to that. It has nothing to do with someone calling it.

Further of course SPYDER is better of the 3. But if all three pass the tests, it comes down to the price. And TOR M2KM wins there.

Further I am not sure / army too if indeginious QR SAM will be made available within 5 years and this one factor is what is leading army to buy one.

 

[Agent_47]

But there is a difference between SR and MR versions and I was referring to that. It has nothing to do with someone calling it.

A service decides what is the distinction is and what to call it.

• We call INS Vikramadithya a 45k ton ship 'Aircraft carrier' when USN calls ships with same capability as 'amphibious assault ship'. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/America-class_amphibious_assault_ship)
• Barak 8 is called Long Range SAM by Navy and Medium Range SAM by Air force
  
• Rafale is called by French as Swing role which is essentially multi role.

Further of course SPYDER is better of the 3. But if all three pass the tests, it comes down to the price. And TOR M2KM wins there.

If thats the process we select things, F-16IN would be selected as winner in MMRCA.
Requirements of the service comes first then comes price.(Todays indian context)

Further I am not sure / army too if indeginious QR SAM will be made available within 5 years and this one factor is what is leading army to buy one.

I don't see much difficulty in doing this since all the requirements at system level is already there. We have many suitable air surveillance radar and also multi mode radar in production. Astra is almost done. Even indigenous RF seeker is coming soon. C2 is not even an issue. High mobility vehicles already there. DRDO is 2-3 years away from production. First test can happen any time.
Tender for fabrication 4/2015 - http://www.drdo.gov.in/drdo/tenders/viewTender.jsp?paramMicro=10216

It is the duty of the services to ready a plan B.

• In 2010 IAF global floated RFI for MR SAM saying Barak 8 is not going as planned. But plan A is now entering service.
• Around 2000 when Trishul project failed Barak 1 was the plan B, which they took.
• IAF's Palitus basic trainer is a plan B when HAL failed to deliver on time.

 

[Ankit Kumar 002]

A service decides what is the distinction is and what to call it.

• We call INS Vikramadithya a 45k ton ship 'Aircraft carrier' when USN calls ships with same capability as 'amphibious assault ship'. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/America-class_amphibious_assault_ship)
• Barak 8 is called Long Range SAM by Navy and Medium Range SAM by Air force
  
• Rafale is called by French as Swing role which is essentially multi role.

If thats the process we select things, F-16IN would be selected as winner in MMRCA.
Requirements of the service comes first then comes price.(Todays indian context)



I don't see much difficulty in doing this since all the requirements at system level is already there. We have many suitable air surveillance radar and also multi mode radar in production. Astra is almost done. Even indigenous RF seeker is coming soon. C2 is not even an issue. High mobility vehicles already there. DRDO is 2-3 years away from production. First test can happen any time.
Tender for fabrication 4/2015 - http://www.drdo.gov.in/drdo/tenders/viewTender.jsp?paramMicro=10216

It is the duty of the services to ready a plan B.

• In 2010 IAF global floated RFI for MR SAM saying Barak 8 is not going as planned. But plan A is now entering service.
• Around 2000 when Trishul project failed Barak 1 was the plan B, which they took.
• IAF's Palitus basic trainer is a plan B when HAL failed to deliver on time.

1. The SPYDER MR is longer range version of SPYDER SR. The MR has missiles with extra boosters, and update in software to intercept things at a longer range and a slightly different command and control. Plus different price.

Here the example of B8 doesn't work because SPYDER MR and SR are different systems.

2.I said if all the three make through the tests , means comply with the requirements .

3.Yet ASTRA is a couple of years away from total induction in air to air roles on pan aircrafts.
And I will be really surprised if we get it done before 2020.

 

[sudhir007]

why not make jv with France for maitri it will fulfill both requirement of IA and IN

 

[Ankit Kumar 002]

why not make jv with France for maitri it will fulfill both requirement of IA and IN

The trials for army one have finished and the reports will be out soon. It shouldn't be delayed more.

 

[sudhir007]

The trials for army one have finished and the reports will be out soon. It shouldn't be delayed more.

yes i know but maitri stuck from 2007 and it is Army and Air Force how did not want.

 

[Ankit Kumar 002]

yes i know but maitri stuck from 2007 and it is Army and Air Force how did not want.

Yes I know , but now that army has move ahead, its program shouldn't be delayed more. Navy should on the other hand should persue JV with France as I don't see an Indian alternative very soon.

 

[Agent_47]

2.I said if all the three make through the tests , means comply with the requirements .

Who said so do you have a press release by IA saying so. Giving some reference when making clams.

3.Yet ASTRA is a couple of years away from total induction in air to air roles on pan aircrafts.
And I will be really surprised if we get it done before 2020.

Again, Astra is on user trials that means it has already passed on to IAF for tests and scheduled to enter production by dec 2016.

"The Astra missile, with a range from 44 to 60km, is coming up very well. I am confident it will be able to meet the revised project completion date of December 2016," said DRDO chief Dr S Christopher, talking to TOI on Thursday.

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/...may-be-ready-in-2016/articleshow/49682035.cms

1. The SPYDER MR is longer range version of SPYDER SR. The MR has missiles with extra boosters, and update in software to intercept things at a longer range and a slightly different command and control. Plus different price.

Extra booster does not stopped IAF from calling it SQ/QR SAM.

Here the example of B8 doesn't work because SPYDER MR and SR are different systems.

how is that ? Barak 8 without boosters are called by IN and IAF different names.

Tag me if you have some real arguments with reference, not with your guess work.

why not make jv with France for maitri it will fulfill both requirement of IA and IN

Maitri is approved for IN. (but,not sure about the current status)
IA will be going for QR/SR SAM in development with DRDO.

 

[Ankit Kumar 002]

Who said so do you have a press release by IA saying so. Giving some reference when making clams.

If I understand the tendering / bidding process its not about choosing the best. Its about choosing the cheapest solution which meets our needs.

Further I nowhere claimed about anyone candidate making it or not making it. I have used the word " If ".

Again, Astra is on user trials that means it has already passed on to IAF for tests and scheduled to enter production by dec 2016.


http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/...may-be-ready-in-2016/articleshow/49682035.cms

How many times our own seeker has been tested till now ?

If I take hints from similar missile development timelines , tests with seeker and its integration does take at least 2 years, further we are taking about its VL version. That's quite a few years away.

Extra booster does not stopped IAF from calling it SQ/QR SAM.

.

In post #3 I said

" Sir its IAF operating SPYDER MR."

To which you said

" No,IAF uses SPYDER for SR/QR duties the same requirmnets IA have."

Now use some comprehension and tell , did I say anything wrong there ?

how is that ? Barak 8 without boosters are called by IN and IAF different names.

Tag me if you have some real arguments with reference, not with your guess work.

In case of B8, the systems used by Navy and AF are same , but here , IAF is using Pythons and Derby with Boosters , while Army is offered the simple SR version by Raytheon.

Did you get the difference between 2?

And as for making guess work ,my guess work is more accurate than 99% of people on PDF.